Ernest Schaal wrote:

> in article 40EB60E3.2020105@hotmail.com, Declan Murphy at
> declan_murphy@hotmail.com wrote on 7/7/04 11:33 AM:
> 
>>Ernest Schaal wrote:
>>
>>>I think you are missing my point. If she comes here and stays, she will be
>>>an immigrant. Her visa might be different than some other immigrants, but
>>>she still is an immigrant, and the nation has full control of deciding those
>>>matters.
>>
>>I fully understand your point (and the associated nitpicks - one of the
>>benefits of being an Application Agent for the Immigration Bureau is
>>reasonable access to staff and familiarity with procedures). What I
>>disagree with is the notion that the state has to right to refuse entry
>>to the legal child/spouse/dependant of a citizen. I think there is
>>something missing from the article (I still haven't found the original
>>July 3rd Japanese article) - perhaps the legal adoption is not yet
>>completed, or perhaps the petitioners do not understand fully the
>>processes of obtaining permanent residence, or whether it is appropriate
>>in the case. Either way, there should be no need or requirement for her
>>to leave the country, even temporarily.
> 
> On what legal basis do you base your conclusion to refuse entry to the legal
> child/spouse/dependant of a citizen? The Japanese Constitution? Japanese
> law? International Law?

Japan's Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (amended). In 
reality of course it isn't the Act that matters, but how the Minister 
(the bureaucrats in reality) interpret it. Note that what I wrote was 
"What I disagree with is the notion that the state has to right to 
refuse entry to the legal child/spouse/dependant of a citizen" - ie not 
a legal basis but a personal opinion. Curious as to the legal shite I 
raised this discussion last night when I was having drinks with our 
immigration lawyer and an (off duty) immigration bureau official. I 
asked him what he'd heard about this - his comment was that though the 
case doesn't look good for PR, it was probably an oversight or due to a 
missing document that the extension wasn't immediately offered. His 
comment was that unless the sponsored spouse/child/dependant is a felon, 
there would usually never be a problem. I wrote earlier in the thread 
that I suspect that there was probably some information missing from the 
article - it is probably related to the adoption papers or death 
certificates.

> I assure you if the non-citizen pre-teen or teenage dependent of citizen in
> the US committed a felony in the US, the INS would seek to deport said
> dependent. Thus, according to US law does NOT support your conclusion that
> the state can't refuse entry to the legal child/spouse/dependant of a
> citizen. What makes you think that Japanese law is that different?

I've noticed that so far all of your examples have been American, but on 
immigration Sepponia has long been a somewhat silly country. Last night 
I also asked what would happen if a non-citizen spouse/dependant of a 
Japanese citizen was convicted of a serious felony in Japan - their 
answer was that it would not likely result in deportation, but in local 
detention. So I asked what would happen if a non-citizen 
spouse/dependant of a permanent foreign resident was convicted of a 
serious felony in Japan - same. Lock 'em up.

-- 
"You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on"